Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Professors Blogg And The Role Of Radical "Feminism" in Sweden's case vs Assange

In the struggle for human hights for All, for gender equality, and the fighting against supremacists of all kind:

THIS - and NOT other - is what Professors blogg has stated on issues related to radical "feminism", in the context of the Swedish case against the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange

Gil Elvgren's famous arte piece "Come on honey! Blondes have more fun!!" Retouched with a fancy cap by Professors blogg

The aim of this article – the second is a series of three - is to set the facts
straight about what Professors blogg has in fact written on
issues related to radical "feminism", in the context of the Swedish case
against the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

As an addenda to my article Christensen vs WikiLeaks? I would like here to point out that Christensen is not only confounding political organization with political ideology (see twitter 1 below); he is also confusing "cause" (or "partial cause") with "contributing factor" (twitter 2). In science, at least in Epidemiology, phenomena are used to be described as having a multi-causal etiology. Yet "cause" is not "factor".

While Professors blogg have only referred to the participating role played by certain radical "feminist" groups in the anti-Assange campaigns - mainly opportunistic, and aimed to mover their positions for a further radicalization of legislation they advocate- we have explained the political context in the "Swedish" case against WikiLeaks and Assange as having a wider scope, in which both domestic and geopolitical factors are primarily involved.

To
state that a variety of known Swedish feminists have used the Swedish
case against Assange as a platform to politically agitate further
radicalization of the legislation is to state only facts.

A panorama of the actual relationships played by these sort “feminism” in the case Assange are explained in the article “Feministerna i Assange-härvan gör våld på feminismen”,
by Helene Bergman, the celebrated feminist and former program director
of the known feminist program ”Radio Ellen” in Swedish Radio.

Known right-wing "radical" Swedish feminists have themselves stated, "Julian Assange is a symbol" for their cause, and actively participated in mediatic anti-Assange campaigns or even publicly celebrated its success.
Organizations of left-wing "radical" Swedish feminists - to the best
of my knowledge - have never taken distance from such deeds or
positions. Moreover, the chairman of the Swedish Party Feminist
Initiative, Gudrun Schyman, has publicly associated the case Assange
with the need of "a better legislation than the one we have".

Right-wing social democratic politicians with a recognized ultra "feminist" agenda - such as Bordström & Borgström
- take pride themselves in representing the plaintiff accusing Assange.
For instance Thomas Bodström - a former Minister of Justice - with his
own words, in his blog "Bodström Samhället" -- as I have referred already in Newsmill. His
partner, the social-democratic politician, known fundamentalist
feminist and former Ombudsman for gender issues, declared himself in the
Guardian 8 December 2010 being instigator of the legal case against
Assange. Equally public are the positions of prominent politicians of
the "Left Party" (formerly “The Communists") such as the Member of
Parliament Eva Brinck for whom, as she wrote in Newsmill, the support given to Assange by Left profiles such as Ken Loach and John Pilger "stinks".

1.
Critic to feminist gender-supremacists is one thing. Support to the
principles and the struggle for gender equality is another.

Professors blogg
is not an “enemy" of feminism insofar feminism would transparently
struggle or implement the aim of universal gender-equality. This can
only be reached by an understanding and cooperation between all
progressive segments of society. Hence, this column has repeatedly
condemn the notion of gender-war, the hatred of men or the hatred of
women.

a) Ideology

We instead promote and practice the struggle for a society with equal opportunities for all
regardless gender, social class, ethnicity. This includes fighting
towards the final achievement of equal opportunities for women and men
in all spheres of society, such as equal salary [See Note 1]; But this
column have been also, and always shall be, opposing all forms of
authoritarianism and oppression, which includes the vigilance towards
those "who merely seek to replace one authoritarian system with another".

True
egalitarian feminism and extreme state-feminism are two different
things, and are expressed in different grades. State-feminism is the
cultural and political movement aimed to establish - with the help of
the authority - institutional privileges or legislation favoring women.
Some of these measures adopted by State Feminism have been inspired
in a notion of gender hatred or contempt. For the extreme feminist
ideology behind the architecture of State-feminism, the
gender-egalitarianism mantra is just a tactical cover in their strategic
to achieve gender supremacy. In this sense, State-Feminism is the
replacement of one abusive rule for another.

b) Feminism has become populism and radical-feminists seek to seize political power by means of psychological deceit

Many
call themselves "feminist" in Sweden. It has became cultural
fashionable but also a politically correct strategy for survival.
Feminism has become populism. One after the other the Swedish political
parties have seized the noun as an adopted family name ("XX Party,
feminist"). However, few of them deploy in reality a consequent activity towards real equality. [2]

In sum, my criticism to fascist
radical-"feminist" positions does not compromise my support for the
sound classical human-rights claims on equality issues for all, for
social and gender justice in society.

As I sustain that the sectarian gender-supremacists' campaign is not to be equated with feminism, I maintain also that the strategy of universal vendetta
against men - argued in their thesis of historical patriarch
domination - is merely a pretext to profit of positions of power in a
new political order sized by psychological deceit:

Radical feminists seek the "collective guilt" of all men by means of a
mass-psychological campaign agitated in the media they have access to,
or control. In Sweden, these radical feminists have even proposed the
obligatory (by law) payment of a "Male-taxation" from
the part of all Swedish men. This law would compensate women for a sort
of endemic patriarchal rule, according to the radical feminists.
Conspicuous such radical-feminist politicians, such as lawyer Claes
Borgström (initiative-author in the accusations against Julian Assange)
are reported staunch supporters of such male-taxation.

Radical-feminism
advocates the demise of nuclear family as central institution in
society. New "modern" forms should replaced it. I believe instead that
it is exactly Family as a whole, and the family as central institution,
the best and only natural structure able to secure the
ontogenetic and philogenetic destiny of humankind and their survival.
Not the state, nor the anti-natural constellations posing as "modern",
not the self-proclaimed gurus of a self-pretended vanguard of
social-ideas evolution such as the Swedish FI. I have already put it in
my clearest terms:

The
so-called Swedish "radical" feminist movement is anything but a
progressive movement. Its ideological matriarchal formulations are on
the regressive side of a wheel moved historically by thousands of
generations towards human justice and equality.

The
epithets of "anti-feminist", "misogynist", "anti gender-egalitarianism"
and the like, thrown to us that oppose the abuse of power coming from a
Feminist-State ideology is just a dirty trick from a movement in
despair and pregnant of defeatism anxiety.

It
just similar in its psychosocial mechanics to the easy and cheap
"racist" accusation given to any criticism to a given failed immigration
policy. This demonization tactic is and old Stalinist trick used in
decades in the past by square bolshevists and modern Party-communists. E.g.
true revolutionaries and social-anarchists were labelled "anti
communists" because we opposed the dogmatic and ill-fated strategy of
the old and modern Stalinist nomenclatures. [3]

Summing
up: Above any sympathy I would have for a true feminist struggle,
paramount for me is the support for justice, equality and human rights
for all genders, and all nations, in all
societies. In other words I do not do a fetish of WASP feminism, and I
certainly do not support the idea of a supremacist female-rule in
society. Neither I would accept the rule of male chauvinism. I have put
my life on the line for my convictions about justice. And I do it still.

2. Sound legislation is one thing. Legal system is another, and case process implementation is yet another thing

It
is equally absurd, or preposterous, disqualify a criticism regarding some
structural flaw in a Swedish institution as anti-Swedish behaviour. The
far most of Swedes can basically agree with the modern Swedish crime-legislation
and think in general it could very well function as model-legislation
elsewhere, and still be critic to aspects of the legal system. And in
the concrete case of the affair Assange the questions posed by the many among the Swedish citizens are for instance the following:

Are the authorities following that legislation in the case Assange?

Is the Swedish legal system flawless?

Is the Swedish legal system really independent from politics and ideology?

Have or not the highest political authorities of Sweden publicly taken side and thus influenced the juridical out come of the case? [4]

I
am not an expert in the Swedish juridical system, and even considering -
as I believe - it is grounded in a sound legislation, I am although critic with regard to the implementation of such legislation in occasions the gender-factor is implicated.

Further, neither can the
political factor in the Swedish courts be totally disregarded with
simple official declarations that the courts are independent of the
state. Judges-appointments at the courts (nämdeman, a kind of permanent jury) are
politically made. In fact, these judges are designated directly by the
political parties according to their representation in the Parliament.
However, this principle does not mean that in each court there is an
"even" distribution according to that one of the Parliament. At the
contrary, the political constellation of judges - read ideological
majority - within each court can vary enormously. Further, considering
that all Swedish political parties have allegedly positioned themselves
in the Assange affair (all parties, including the Pirate Party), I even
speculate as whether the Assange case has served some times as a
vendetta for ideological reasons, or some times as instrument for populist reasons. And also if the case has been used as a pretext for radical-feminists to give international publicity to their theses.

With regard to structural flaws in the legal system as such, I only can subscribe what Jens Lapidus and Johan Åkermark have pedagogically explained in theirdebate article in DN . It was also shown there that the majority of Swedish lawyers manifest criticism to the legal management of the Assange case.

With regard to the “peculiar” position of de Swedish Judiciary and its outmost

artificially constructed proceeding in the Assange case.

These
proceedings fit instead one hundred percent in the
perspective-analysis of an active involvement of some Swedish
officials, or institutions, as instruments in the geopolitical
design of the foreign power they apparently obey.

I am aware how horrible and highly
conspiratorial the above might sound, but I could myself hardly
believe it was true – when I read an article in Expressen[8 Feb.] –
that the very Prime Minister of Sweden Mr. Fredrik Reinfeldt, whom
this column have elsewhere referred as a politician with honourable
marks - made public statements involving officially and openly the
Swedish government in the London Court deliberations referring
exclussively to protecting the rights of the accusers (the two women)
involved in the Assange extradition process.

Let me first to recall that in my article published in Newsmill Jan 11
I clearly advanced the hypothesis on whether behind the Sweden case
against Assange it truly exists the intention of making a pilot case of
the event. Meaning, to use Assange's celebrity to reassure or move
forwards positions in the Swedish legislative process towards a
radicalization in the penalty of sex-offences, or the enhancing of
criminal conceptualization in that regard.

In declarations published in Aftonbladet"i samband med domstolsförhandlingarna om utlämningen av Julian Assange i London", PM Reinfeldt "reveals" what would be "really" the issue at stake. Reinfelt said concretely:

"Let us not forget what is here at risk. It is
the right for women to have their case tested in court as to
whether what they have been subjected of is a criminal
abuse (offence)"

I put in serious doubt that Reinfeldt would
really consider the content of his statement above as THE reason for
the Swedish offensive aganist Assange and Wikileaks. For there is
evidence that the "pilot-case factor" is only a part in the
constellation of causes behind the Swedish political crusade against Assange and Wikileaks.

Nevertheless, Reinfeldt did try
also to defend the integrity of the kingdom’s judiciary – which would
be totally understandable for his position as surrogate head of state
(Sweden is still a monarchy and Prime Ministers receive formally the
assignment from the king). However, he just made things worst. What
Reinfeldt in the main ended in pointing out - in the name of the
Swedish government - was the publicly taking side on behalf of the two
accusers-ladies, for which he demanded respect very much exclusively.
This is what he stated in Expressen:

"that
in this way attempt to circumvent it and make it appear that their
rights are worth very little, I think that's regrettable."

•"Criticism
to extreme "feminists" or "feminist" gender-supremacists is
one thing. Support to the principles and the struggle for gender equality is
another. We instead promote and practice the struggle
for a society with equal opportunities for all regardless gender, social
class, ethnicity. This includes fighting towards the final achievement of equal
opportunities for women and men in all spheres of society, such as equal
salary; But this column have been also, and always shall be, opposing all forms
of authoritarianism and oppression, which includes the vigilance towards those
"who merely seek to replace one
authoritarian system with another". [1]

•"Professors
blogg – a publication (see banner on
top) “On Human Rights For All” - have clearly stated that strongly support the
same struggle for gender equality in society that true egalitarian feminists pursue.
This have included active propositions on equality in salary form the part of
the Swedish State towards academics with similar merits regardless gender. My
positions on these regards are well known." [2]

•"One of
the main myths spread refer to Julian Assange as “enemy of feminism”. The
statement cannot be more far from truth. His liberationist platform
clearly comprises the struggle for equal rights as identified by the
international feminist movement. Conspicuous feminists, such as Naomi Wolf or
in Sweden Helene Bergman have expressly given their support to Julian Assange’s
struggle for justice in the context of the Swedish case against him. In strict
ideological sense, left radical-feminists would find in true an identification
of their societal purposes for justice and equality for all genders in the
liberationist message of WikiLeaks as well as the actual statements of
Julian Assange. Radical-feminists should not permit their spirit been kidnapped
by right-wing opportunists, which in the base defend a political system
opposing equality of all kinds.What has happened in Sweden is that a
limited number of self-proclaimed “radical feminists”, for the most part
right-wingers, have initiated or participated in campaigns ad-hominem
against the WikiLeaks founder. And that in my opinion is NOT left radical
feminism; it is simply opportunism." [3]

•My conviction
is still that the campaign in Sweden against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
has been initiated/implemented by a limited number of political officials, a
limited number of journalists, or a limited number of opportunist "feminist"
activists -mainly right wingers. Altogether they do not represent Sweden as a whole, their political
parties as a whole, all Swedish feminists, or the total ranks in
the journalist collegium. The main part have not yet express their opinion and
as the happenings approach they will most certain feel ethically obliged to
declare their stance, about what is truth, what is justice, and what is history.
[4]

Over and over
again I have made clear what my positions are on those regards. And also cared
to give some concrete examples about my own participation in such struggle for
gender equality and social justice. The site Justice For
Assange has even linked an article
that especially treats this disclaimer under the title "Professor
Ferrada Noli on the nature of 'State Feminism' in Sweden".

V

I wrote the
following about the political aspects in the Swedish case on Assange
in "This is why":

A. The political
aspects

In its turn, the
political aspects determining or influencing the reporting appear being
twofold:

On the one hand
we have the change in the
foreign policy and military-strategy main perspective of the
Swedish government, namely, abandon of the neutrality-stand and identification
with NATO and the geopolitical interests this organization
represents. In this line, the government would demonstrate - as they have done
in the Afghanistan and Libyan cases
- that Sweden is a “loyal partner” and long away from the late Olof Palme’s
policy of alignment with the Third World countries.

It is worth to
note that changes in those regards started already by the times of the former
social democratic government of Göran Persson. This can be illustrated
with secret
agreements on cooperation with
USA services which otherwise had became known through the rendition-flight
episodes (political refuges in Sweden handed over in secret to the American
services to be transported to interrogation centres elsewhere, as in the case of the
Egyptians refugees).

Sweden's acting
in the apprehension of a USA’s number-one enemy - as Julian Assange is
characterized - might be a confirmation of the above.

For these ends,
the government have naturally got the support of all the political parties
favouring the NATO approach, including the “opposition” (mainly the social
democratic party).

Although is
natural and legitimate that a Swedish government - as the USA or any other
sovereign country - decides the foreign policy they think it best would serve
their national interests, the problem here is of another kind. It has to do
with important decisions that have been adopted in secret by government
officials and hidden to the Swedish Parliament and the public. It is about
the transparencyissue.

Yet another
issue is whether that "double play" from the part of the Swedish
government is really necessary in the interest of Sweden's foreign policy (DN-debatt 10/12
2009).

It is worth to
mention that the Assange accusers,
and notably members of the prosecution and police apparatus that have actively
pursued or dealt with the Assange case are members of the same radical-feminist
organizations or share their ideology.

In sum,
the Swedish crusade against
the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has shown being compact and having the
characteristic of a national cause.

The above have
generated a strong
populism-factor around the case, and hence also a profitable source
for other political or cultural opportunists in the Swedish forum, in the
blogosphere and others authors not previously known as embracing political
correct positions. The critical voices on the Assange case in Sweden have
became fewer, and had to pay a high price for their objective and ethical
stand.

2.The
expected effect of the above among the Swedish constituencies is double fold:
a) on the one hand finding an explanation to replace the real causes that are
behind such international deterioration of Swedish prestige. As this is
undoubtedly related to issues of Sweden’s foreign policy, this measure
represents also an attempt to stop the analyses on such relationships with
foreign powers; b) on the other hand, by obtaining a national cohesion behind
the government that “defends” Sweden [20] and shows
being ready to “process and punish” Sweden’s Number One enemy, the rulers use
the “chauvinist trick” of having people to switch attention from economic or
domestic political issues to issues of “national interest”.

3.One
remarkable feature regarding the above is that in Sweden very seldom are legal aspects
of the case against Assange ventilated in the press – actually it
has occurred only in very few occasions. Instead, what has been a constant
action presented particularly by the State owned media (National Television
channels, Radio, etc.) is the blaming of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, accused
of having an anti-Sweden political agenda. This has reached extremes as to
publicly accuse Assange and WikiLeaks of blackmailing Sweden or implied
WikiLeaks would be protecting Russian’s interests (Sweden’s “arch
enemy”). See this analysis under "Sweden’s Plan “Z”, Phase 6:
Swedish State Television explaining "why" WikiLeaks should be viewed
as detrimental for the "interests of our nation", in Part II of this
series: "Plan Z: the latest national
chauvinist campaign anti-WIkiLeaks in the Swedish media". [21]

4.Domestic
political factors regarding the opportunity being used by local political
organizations, such as fundamentalist groups, that, voided of a large
mass-support, are bound parasitically from highly publicized media-events in
order to move forward their political agenda through some journalists in their
ranks employed by the MSM. These organizations have not made secret that the
Julian Assange case is a symbol for
their struggle[22], a campaign seeking the
further radicalizing of the legislation in Sweden towards, among other things
“only sexual contact after written consent”, a national tax
imposed to all men (mansskatt) in Sweden [23] ("to
compensate Swedish women of centuries of men patriarchal dominance”), and the
increasing in the penalty for sexual-related offences attributed to the
“nature” of men ("men are animals", as expressed by the President of
the State-supported nation-wide organization ROKS). [24] In
the ranks of this multifaceted fundamentalist cohort are found people of
different professions, not only journalists. Example of notable Swedish
politicians which have advocated for such further radicalization of the law are
Thomas Bodström (the former minister of Justice) and the former Ombudsman for
gender issues Claes Borgström. They also established the Law firm
Bodström & Bogström, which is the law firm that defended the plaintiffs in
their “accusations” against Julian Assange. Marianne Ny, the prosecutor in the
case has been also participating in the preparation of the present “radical”
legislation – under which the Swedish State has asked to “investigate” Julian
Assange.

That means: You are free to copy, distribute, display, the above-referred materials, under the following conditions

Attribution. You must attribute the work (full text, text excerpts, or artwork as indicated above) in this specified manner: Author’s name and hyperlink of the article or artwork in the Professors blog

Any of these conditions may be waived by seeking permission from Professors blogg. For contact email fdenoli@gmail.com